1 APHC010191482017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] THURSDAY ,THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 31867/2017 Between: Director, M/s.agro Form Pvt. Ltd., Eg Dist ...PETITIONER AND Prl Secretary Municipal Admin Amaravthi 5 Others and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. K VENKATESH Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP-MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV(AP) 2. GP FOR INDUSTRIES COMMERCE (AP) 3. KAMBHAM MADHAVA REDDY 4. GHANTA SRIDHAR 5. S PRANATHI 6. SARANU PHANI TEJA The Court made the following: 2 ORDER : This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “....to issue appropriate writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in according permissions for construction buildings in the land belongs to the petitioner in an extent of Ac.1.34 cents in R.S.No.397/1 situated Atmakur Village, Mangalagiri Mandal, Guntur District vide sanction order in FP No.2/2016/MGL dt.28.3.2016 in favour of the 6th respondent as wholly illegal, arbitrary and unjust and contrary to provisions of Andhra Pradesh Capital Region Development Authority (CRDA) and the rules there under and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to take appropriate action for cancellation of building permission accorded to the 6th respondent…” 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents. 3. It is brought to the notice of this Court that the 6th respondent has submitted a representation to the Commissioner-respondent No.2 requesting him to alter the building permission granted in his favour vide FP.No.2/2016/MGL/321/2015/MGL, dated 28.03.2016 in favour of the 5th respondent as per the subject lease and the rectification deeds executed by him. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that pending the present writ petition, the petitioner herein has approached the Mandal Legal Services Committee under Section 19 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 and an award was passed by the legal services authority on 21.07.2018, wherein the 6th respondent herein has agreed to remove the temporary structures raised by him at the time of vacating the premises without causing any damage to the structure of the applicant in the leasehold property and the 3 applicant i.e., the petitioner herein has also agreed to withdraw the present writ petition pending before this Court. 4. Today when the matter came up for hearing, Mrs. S.Pranathi, learned Standing Counsel has brought to the notice of this Court that there is no such provision under APCRDA Act to transfer or change the building permission accorded in favour of one person to the other person. 5. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that the subject lease entered by the 6th respondent is going to expire within a period of three months but however it is an admitted fact that so far no orders have been passed on the representation submitted by the petitioner on 08.06.2017. 6. In view of the same, this Court feels it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the 2nd respondent to pass appropriate orders on the representation made by the petitioner on 08.06.2017, in accordance with law. All the parties are directed to abide with the terms and conditions of the award. 7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. __________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date: 13.02.2025 JLV